Van Wyck v. Dickinson
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent; Wolcott, J. Case by Le Roy Van Wyck, by next friend, against Albert G. Dickinson for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed. Defendant carries on the business of printing and engraving in the city of Grand Rapids, using printing presses of various kinds and electricity for motive power.
Read the full summary
Error to Kent; Wolcott, J. Case by Le Roy Van Wyck, by next friend, against Albert G. Dickinson for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed. Defendant carries on the business of printing and engraving in the city of Grand Rapids, using printing presses of various kinds and electricity for motive power. Plaintiff, a lad of 15 years of age, was employed in the establishment, and on February '5, 1906, was feeding a Peerless press, when several of the sheets of paper, which were yellow slips to be used for…
1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.
(after stating the facts). The most favorable construction which can be placed upon the testimony for plaintiff is that the key, which was a proper part of the press, had worked out of position so that it projected some, but very little, beyond the end of the shaft. ■ It is not a common thing, but these keys do sometimes work loose. In other respects the press was in perfect order. It was the one upon which, under instruction, plaintiff had three months before learned to work. His duty was to start, feed, and stop it. In starting and stopping it he used a lever. All of its parts were visible,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ferguson v. GiesMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Borck v. Michigan Bolt & Nut WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cressler v. King Paper Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Martin v. Jerry Madden Shingle Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Lehto v. Atlantic Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908